About Me

Friday, February 03, 2017

Shakespeare

-->

Willm Shackper

That's
one of the ways he signed his name.

Rash
statements are my speciality. Consistency in the rashness is less
obvious. One exception: I have always said that I would do a deal
with the Devil in order to spend just one day with Shakespeare when
he was alive and writing. I would gladly trade all the rest of my
days for just one in his company. Just give me a week to get my
things in order and then I'm definitely up for it.

Why?
He was just the most incredible of writing geniuses. I would like
to know how he did it. I would like to try to understand how anyone
could so consistently produce genius, seemingly at the drop of a hat.
It still awes and amazes me every time I consider it.

It
was not always so. At the age of 15 my introduction to the Bard was
both late and uninspiring. In the 60's studying Shakespeare was
based on the text; and, as I am very keen to point out to modern
students, not very satisfying, imaginative or interesting.

Studying
like that was, and is, boring and almost guaranteed to put you off
for life. What “saved” me was the play chosen for study -
Julius Caesar.

I
have always been interested in Rome and Roman history, so Caesar was
a natural for me. I like history (in the 8th grade I won five
dollars in the Daughters of the American Revolution history contest –
I got 49 out of 50 questions correct I missed the one about Teddy
Roosevelt, I knew that FDR was a Democrat so I guessed that Teddy was
one as well – no – he was a Republican and a Progressive – damn
Ol Teddy he cost me another 5 bucks and the first place glory).

Caesar
in the dark ages – i.e. before video tape, cd's, dvd's – was a
challenge for pupils and teachers alike. Why?

Simple.
I told pupils why for more than 30 years. Skakespeare wrote plays,
not books. Plays are meant to be acted on a stage (or as a movie).
They are not meant to be read, either out loud or silently to
yourself. To make sense of what is going on you have to see it!

Witness
(and slip in a real good moan at the same time) the BBC – a
venerable and mercenary broadcaster. Between 1978 and 1985 the Beeb
commisioned and screened all 37 plays. They are quite truly
wonderful, as they featured some of the most expert and famous actors
of the day.

Then
in a feat of the most uninspiring and possibly criminal opportunism
and shameless exploitation of the long-suffering license-payer the
BBC steadfastly has refused to air them again – as soon, and if you
think this is co-incidental you need professional help, as video
recorders became generally available. You can of course see these
marvellous productions provided you buy the video from the BBC –
and they are not cheap.

So
much for inspiring a new generation of Bard fans. Thanks Auntie.

I
do have a collection of plays that were aired co-incidental with
modern technology and I used them extensively during the 90's and
noughties.

Thus
Shakespeare became a joy to teach. The language came alive and
pupils suddenly “got it”. Fantastic.

After
Caesar I moved on to Richard III. I say moved on but it was more
like struggled on really.

Firstly,
a rather attractive girl I knew invited me to spend the weekend at
her Granny's farm. Could I say no? Not likely. As luck would have
it, my weekend was promised to reading Richard III as well. Now
truly it was a “winter of discontent” even though it was May.

My
amorous adventures turned out to be non-existent, but I made little
progress with Richard either. Why? This may be Shakespeare's most
difficult play, though it was, apparently, very popular in his time.
Why so?

Simple.
It's a soap opera. And just like Eastenders if you don't know who
the characters are and how they are related to each other you have
little chance of making sense of it.

When
I taught it for A level, I always spent a week (figuratively that is)
in the 1480's. Unless you understand how society worked then you
have little chance of understanding Richard III.